Oh, it's worth pointing out that this article is quoting Katy Huberty, who has an undeniably lousy track record in predicting Apple's movements.
If she says something is going to happen, the smart bet is that the opposite will end up being the case. Same with Gene Munster. AppleInsider missed the "crap analyst" hat trick by not quoting Shaw Wu. These three are not star-rated analysts.
I think there are several problems with this rumor...
1) Blow Netflix out of the water? Apple just signed netflix up. They could easily say F_it, but why did they bother to begin with?
2) A 40" (ish) iTV would HAVE to sell for around $500 to $800 ($1k for the mythical "apple tax"?) for the average customer to even care about an "iTV". The iPad wouldn't have reached saturation at any higher of a price than where it's at and even at that price point people still think it's pricey. (who knows why?), but there is so little margin in that price range what would be the point?
True Apple sells products at Walmart and Best Buy now, but they've successfully maintained margins even in those locations.
I would guess that an iTV would first be sold at Apple stores at a higher price point and subsequent generations (older, cheaper models) could be sold for less at Big Box stores if this were to happen.
3) Apple has yet to offer 1080p on the iTunes store. Why pay a premium for the TV and then pay a premium for substandard media? BD is relatively cheap. I personally hate disks and don't have a BD player, but I do RIP BD disks to go into my library. The media I have bought from iTunes is paltry at best in comparison and would be wasted on an iTV that I assume would be branded as a "superior display" in some way. Would Apple revert to a 720p display? I doubt it. iTunes HD movies are delivered at about 4mb/s, but I'll tell ya even 720p looks allot better 10mb/s. If their HD movies were delivered at 1080p & 10 mb/s it might hold its weight against BD, but there is a big difference between a 4GB file and a 10GB file. What's an uncompressed BD? Something like 25GB? Just put an iTunes 720p movie on a 23" cinema and fill the display, you'll see what I'm talking about. The problem wont' be worse at 40" per se (obviously that would be 1080 or 720 at 40 or 50 inches), but then you're encroaching on the point of image degradation. Most living rooms are not that big especially in say your typical NYC, LA or San Fran apartment in my experience. You can't sit that far from a large screen TV in many living rooms. Even in America.
4) A subscription iTunes plan would be needed IMO. We might see it coming with the new iCloud service? But I also believe (and Apps on ATV might help this problem too) news (local or otherwise) and sports would be a problem. It wasn't for me, but that's all I hear from people when you talk to them about cutting the cable.
5) We have yet to see games on the ATV so what about 3rd party consoles? I'm sure apple would prefer not seeing a Sony PS or Xbox360 hooked up to their display. Would the new device offer connections for third party devices? If so how does that give Apple the control or ability to push (lock in the user to) the iTunes store/ ecosystem that they would want?
6) There would be little point to large screen iTV's without clean, wire free a sound system to back it up. It just fits Apple's mindset.
7) I would think Apple would "have" to license the tech out to Samsung or their ilk, but that hasn't worked out for Apple yet and it definitely goes against Steve's way of doing things.
Most of these "problems" could be solved if Apple changed things drastically, but things would have to change... drastically.
Subscriptions would probably have to be set up, Apple would should offer 1080p streams at least (most people aren't going to invest in hard drives for 1080p quality that rivals BD), Apps would probably have to be ported to ATV for things like games and subscriptions to sports and news channels and if Apple had their druthers they would probably like to see the whole thing integrated with a wireless sound system.
All that at a near discounted price typical of the consumer electronics market? That's a tall order, but I will say that cheap devices are Apple's new game. Maybe and if they do even some of the above with reasonable hopes for more in the future, I will be (admittedly) first in line to buy one for sure.
True, but its still a hassle for someone like my Mom, more so with surround sound, more so with other media sources, etc. ATV does not address the multiple remote control and multiple source inputs problem. Apple can never offer an optimal, simple, yet flexible experience without closer integration with the TV. The current ATV, when you remove the case and power supply is just a very small $30 board.
Theres no reason Apple can't make a TV with a slot for a similar board that will give the product a longer life (upgradable) and make things simple. They could eventually license the slot to other companies so any customer could make their TV an Apple TV. The value is in the simplification of using a TV and nobody else is in the position to make that value offering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by boss1
Apple isn't building another flat screen / HD / 3D etc with nothing to offer other than what Apple TV already does + screen. That does NOT sound like the "go to" market strategy Apple has been looking for.
Has apple built prototypes of a television? probably, but it's not going to market.
Step 1.
The go to market strategy starts with licensing. (sports channels, premium channels ie cinemax, showtime, other networks etc.) a very similar model that current cable providers have in place but they do so through hard lines (coaxial, fiber & set top boxes) .
Step 2.
revenue stream. the sale of each little black Apple TV as a hardware component is NOT Apple's cash cow. It's in the monthly service Apple will collect and split with content providers.
Step 3.
hardware. Can Apple accomplish this by selling a 50" Apple branded screen? yes. But they can also accomplish the same thing with a little black Apple TV with an HDMI cable. So why would Apple expect consumers to abandon their current flat screens and do so knowing that the TV market changes so quickly, that the 50" Apple branded screen will be outdated by a new type of 3D TV every few months?
All Apple has to do is continue to offer the current set top box "Apple TV" with a version of iOS that is capable of handling the massive amounts of streaming live content. Let the consumer pick whatever size screens they want (sony, samsung, mits, etc) and offer a compelling alternative to watching TV that is not their local cable provider.
maybe Apple will team up with some OEM to build ATV into HDTV's. there is some advantage to that for dummy consumers - the majority.
but what would really sell ATV's faster pronto is to build it into Airport Extreme. every home needs a wifi/router hub. adding ATV would mean one less box and a lot more capabilities for a mere $100 more.
the AirPlay mirroring combo with iPad iOS 5 will be the Big New Thing that ignites sales.
This must be some seriously old data they are working with, because a 40 inch LCD TV does not cost $1199. I did a check at Best Buy for LCD televisions between 40 and 49 inches, and not one of them was over $1000. The vast majority were under $700, and about 1/3 were under $600. That means that the base price they used in this analysis is almost 2 times higher than it should be. Add to that the nonsense of the cost for a DVR (most people get it with their cable), plus the ridiculous add-on for game console and receiver, and it just gets sad. The figures look more like an attempt to create parity between the non-Apple offering and what the analyst hopes Apple might sell a unit for.
Bottom line: if Apple introduces a 40 inch television that costs $2000, they'd better be prepared to watch it sit on shelves. It doesn't matter how compelling the total solution is - that price point is simply too high. You can buy 50 to 60 inch LED televisions in that price range (for less, actually) and many of them will ship with Netflix or Google TV built in. Perhaps those are inferior, but an offering from Apple, even including a TV pass and iOS games and applications... is not competitive enough at the price point indicated here.
This is a very flawed analysis. Although I can't make any guess as to whether or not Apple plans a TV, I can say that if they do make one, it better not come in at this price point, because that is a non-starter.
The idea of an Apple-branded HDTV is still farfetched, but it is not as farfetched as it once was. The TV market is changing. A few observations:
Netflix has a download service for computers, Blu-ray players, and TVs.
Many digital TV sets are Linux-based.
A growing number of "smart TVs" look an awful lot like huge iPads.
An iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch will make a great universal remote control that is truly "universal." Just like the iPhone has a nearly perfect emulator app for the HP48 handheld calculator, it should be possible to produce nearly perfect emulators for all models of remote controls for STBs, DVD players, Blu-ray players, and such like. The remote also need not require the user to remember channel numbers. Want to see college baseball on ESPN2? Press the ESPN2 button on the touch surface on the remote.
Apple sells the iPad at a price-point lower than some of the competition. It is practically giving away OS X Lion. One should not expect a substantial premium for the Apple-branded TV if it is ever comes to market.
TV models are updated annually, but individual owners may hold on to theirs for a decade or longer.
There is huge downward pressure on the price of TV sets. Many flatscreens today cost about the same as did larger tube-based sets of a decade ago.
OTA TV is not much of a problem. However, cable is a huge problem. Cable ISPs are much more fractured than cellphones. In some locations, you have a different cable provider if you move across the street.
Cable providers are naturally pricks. They are even more so because they have to kow-tow to bigtime Hollywood producers.
The TV must be compatible with satellite, IPTV, providers like Verizon FIOS and AT&T U-Verse.
This is an intriguing prospect for a number of reasons. One is that parts of the story are nearly impossible to believe. No current or former Apple executive would leak the story. He could be sued by Apple. If he were identified, then his new employer would not trust him. As I stated above, I don't believe the $2,000 price point.
The market for TV sets is a challenging one. However, if Apple decides to enter it, then I am confident that it has plans to overcome the challenges.
The things that makes this intriguing the possibilities of change brought by Apple. Apple persuaded the record labels to end DRM in the iTMS. It persuaded AT&T to give great data plans for the iPhone and iPad.
It would be wonderful if Apple could break the cable providers' fixation of scrambling. Customer hate the cable box, but the providers foist them on us anyway. The Federal Government mandated the CableCard, but many cable franchises refuse to provide them. The prospect of Steve Jobs taking on the hide-bound culture of the cable companies is very nice to think about.
My bet is that Netflix eventually go the same way as Microsoft,Nokia,RIM,Sony,Nintendo and other supposedly 'untouchable' companies.
I'm not sure what you mean when you use the term "go the same way as" in connection with household brands like Sony, Nokia, and Microsoft. While Apple has succeeded in bringing some challenges to their businesses, it is far from a fore-gone conclusion that they are all on their way out. Apple has a very narrow and very successful business... but it is not a business that is going to put a Sony, Microsoft, or Nokia under the table.
Of the bunch you mention, only RIM I think is truly at risk of being put to death by Apple.
My bet is that Netflix eventually go the same way as Microsoft,Nokia,RIM,Sony,Nintendo and other supposedly 'untouchable' companies.
Google and/or Apple will assimilate or destroy them 100% for sure. I give them 3 years tops, and within that time the cracks will start showing.
Blockbuster might be a more apropos analogy.
All netflix has is deals with content owners which Apple also has, though in a different .way. If Apple wanted to push for the same catalog as netflix in the same distribution model as Netflix they could probably get it once Netflix's current contracts are over.
I believe I read that Showtime will not be renewing with Netflix so that is something. If Netflix starts getting holes in their catalog the way Hulu does then the service could be seen as undesirable.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
And so on.
Mobile phones margins are also thin (except for Apple mobile phones :-). And it's not about just margins, it about expanding ecosystem.
Sound would not be any worse then current Samsung or Sony TV, however there some new light digital amplifier technologies are available. From Sharp, for instance, this one pumps 70w per channel: http://www.ultimateavmag.com/content...iversal-player
I'd be surprised if any Apple-branded TV set was as simple as a rebadged set from another manufacturer with AppleTV integrated into the guts. Far more likely they'd design the thing in-house and do something unexpected. Apple is a disruptor. They never just make a product in a category any more.
I'm not sure what you mean when you use the term "go the same way as" in connection with household brands like Sony, Nokia, and Microsoft. While Apple has succeeded in bringing some challenges to their businesses, it is far from a fore-gone conclusion that they are all on their way out. Apple has a very narrow and very successful business... but it is not a business that is going to put a Sony, Microsoft, or Nokia under the table.
Of the bunch you mention, only RIM I think is truly at risk of being put to death by Apple.
I mean that people have said on this very forum, that all the above companies I mentioned had strangleholds which Apple could not or should not bother going up against. Apple has shoved every one of them aside and is now eating their lunch.
I'm sure none of them will disappear forever, but they sure are not the dominating beasts they once were.
And I see no decent reason why history will not repeat itself with netflix.
Thats a no brainer prediction IMO, and you are welcome to quote me on this in a couple of years.
Their best bet is to adopt Android in the long run. I see no other option. Same goes for RIM.
There is only room for one company to utilise Apples business model. Just as Apple was the last man standing against the likes of Amiga/Atari/Sinclair/Texas Instruments/ etc in the 80's 90's, history will repeat itself.
Jump on the android train or shut the company down and give the money back to the shareholders. Thats my advice! And I guarantee that HP fails in it's latest attempt to copy the Apple model as well.
Oh and as for Nokia and Microsoft, I look forward to seeing the comedy duo's next act. It should keep us entertained for at least a few more years.
Just run the optical out to your home theater system.
Did you expect any TV to replace a home theater system? If so, why?
No, I was trying to understand what the OP meant when he said that he replaced his "stereo" with an Apple TV. Out of all the A/V components, the only thing I could consider to be a stereo would be the receiver (since it usually has a radio tuner) which is generally the heart and soul of any home theater setup. If it had been the DVD player or CD player (or both) I could understand, but using the term "stereo" seems to say he gutted his system by removing the receiver portion and plugged an AppleTV (both audio and video) into his TV. And that would hardly result in a particularly good audio experience.
If Apple introduces the iTV I just hope that they don't kill the ATV.
They tend to offer very few different models in one category and to be honest my TV in the living room is larger than 30'' and the TVs in other rooms are a lot smaller (because of space constraints).
I have no problem with iTV as long as the keep selling the ATV.
You do understand the TV is the device you watch Netflix on and not Netflix itself? I rely on Netflix now as well. I, however, definitely think Apple is going this route. When I was shopping for my recent TV, I saw a Samsung TV I almost bought. It had tons of TV applications like Netflix, but it also had a full fledge web browser. I can see the TV eventually taking a big chunk out of PC sales for people who aren't big computer users. If I can surf the Internet, read my email, and do other things typically associated on the TV, why would I buy a computer as well? I found the feature very enticing. It was cool because you could surf the internet and at the small time watch the TV in a smaller box like picture in picture.
At the end of the day, I didn't buy that set because 1) cost was a bit higher then a wanted to spend, 2) Samsung's picture quality stinks in relation to Sharp, 3) Sharp's TV was designed better, and 4) I couldn't see myself supporting a foreign company that likes to rip everybody else off. I was tempted though.
TV applications are the next big thing. TV is a perfect fit for Apple. Apple provides the hardware along with seamless integration of Apple's other devices. App developers have another iOS device to make money on. Apple hedges its bets agains the future when PCs might be irrelevant for many. I was in a bankruptcy proceeding the other day. The government assistant was using an iPad with an attached keyboard to conduct business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Negafox
I don't believe it's true in the least. For starters, how would bundling iTunes with a TV blow Netflix away? I can pay $7.99/month and watch all the TV shows and movies I want. iTunes does not offer any comparable rental service. Also, I can watch Netflix on my Wii in one bedroom, PS3 in the living room, my Macbook Pros and iPhones. Even if Apple did offer a comparable rental service, with Netflix, I'm not locked to an Apple-branded device.
Comments
Oh, it's worth pointing out that this article is quoting Katy Huberty, who has an undeniably lousy track record in predicting Apple's movements.
If she says something is going to happen, the smart bet is that the opposite will end up being the case. Same with Gene Munster. AppleInsider missed the "crap analyst" hat trick by not quoting Shaw Wu. These three are not star-rated analysts.
You mean the "Incompetent Three"?
1) Blow Netflix out of the water? Apple just signed netflix up. They could easily say F_it, but why did they bother to begin with?
2) A 40" (ish) iTV would HAVE to sell for around $500 to $800 ($1k for the mythical "apple tax"?) for the average customer to even care about an "iTV". The iPad wouldn't have reached saturation at any higher of a price than where it's at and even at that price point people still think it's pricey. (who knows why?), but there is so little margin in that price range what would be the point?
True Apple sells products at Walmart and Best Buy now, but they've successfully maintained margins even in those locations.
I would guess that an iTV would first be sold at Apple stores at a higher price point and subsequent generations (older, cheaper models) could be sold for less at Big Box stores if this were to happen.
3) Apple has yet to offer 1080p on the iTunes store. Why pay a premium for the TV and then pay a premium for substandard media? BD is relatively cheap. I personally hate disks and don't have a BD player, but I do RIP BD disks to go into my library. The media I have bought from iTunes is paltry at best in comparison and would be wasted on an iTV that I assume would be branded as a "superior display" in some way. Would Apple revert to a 720p display? I doubt it. iTunes HD movies are delivered at about 4mb/s, but I'll tell ya even 720p looks allot better 10mb/s. If their HD movies were delivered at 1080p & 10 mb/s it might hold its weight against BD, but there is a big difference between a 4GB file and a 10GB file. What's an uncompressed BD? Something like 25GB? Just put an iTunes 720p movie on a 23" cinema and fill the display, you'll see what I'm talking about. The problem wont' be worse at 40" per se (obviously that would be 1080 or 720 at 40 or 50 inches), but then you're encroaching on the point of image degradation. Most living rooms are not that big especially in say your typical NYC, LA or San Fran apartment in my experience. You can't sit that far from a large screen TV in many living rooms. Even in America.
4) A subscription iTunes plan would be needed IMO. We might see it coming with the new iCloud service? But I also believe (and Apps on ATV might help this problem too) news (local or otherwise) and sports would be a problem. It wasn't for me, but that's all I hear from people when you talk to them about cutting the cable.
5) We have yet to see games on the ATV so what about 3rd party consoles? I'm sure apple would prefer not seeing a Sony PS or Xbox360 hooked up to their display. Would the new device offer connections for third party devices? If so how does that give Apple the control or ability to push (lock in the user to) the iTunes store/ ecosystem that they would want?
6) There would be little point to large screen iTV's without clean, wire free a sound system to back it up. It just fits Apple's mindset.
7) I would think Apple would "have" to license the tech out to Samsung or their ilk, but that hasn't worked out for Apple yet and it definitely goes against Steve's way of doing things.
Most of these "problems" could be solved if Apple changed things drastically, but things would have to change... drastically.
Subscriptions would probably have to be set up, Apple would should offer 1080p streams at least (most people aren't going to invest in hard drives for 1080p quality that rivals BD), Apps would probably have to be ported to ATV for things like games and subscriptions to sports and news channels and if Apple had their druthers they would probably like to see the whole thing integrated with a wireless sound system.
All that at a near discounted price typical of the consumer electronics market? That's a tall order, but I will say that cheap devices are Apple's new game. Maybe and if they do even some of the above with reasonable hopes for more in the future, I will be (admittedly) first in line to buy one for sure.
Theres no reason Apple can't make a TV with a slot for a similar board that will give the product a longer life (upgradable) and make things simple. They could eventually license the slot to other companies so any customer could make their TV an Apple TV. The value is in the simplification of using a TV and nobody else is in the position to make that value offering.
Apple isn't building another flat screen / HD / 3D etc with nothing to offer other than what Apple TV already does + screen. That does NOT sound like the "go to" market strategy Apple has been looking for.
Has apple built prototypes of a television? probably, but it's not going to market.
Step 1.
The go to market strategy starts with licensing. (sports channels, premium channels ie cinemax, showtime, other networks etc.) a very similar model that current cable providers have in place but they do so through hard lines (coaxial, fiber & set top boxes) .
Step 2.
revenue stream. the sale of each little black Apple TV as a hardware component is NOT Apple's cash cow. It's in the monthly service Apple will collect and split with content providers.
Step 3.
hardware. Can Apple accomplish this by selling a 50" Apple branded screen? yes. But they can also accomplish the same thing with a little black Apple TV with an HDMI cable. So why would Apple expect consumers to abandon their current flat screens and do so knowing that the TV market changes so quickly, that the 50" Apple branded screen will be outdated by a new type of 3D TV every few months?
All Apple has to do is continue to offer the current set top box "Apple TV" with a version of iOS that is capable of handling the massive amounts of streaming live content. Let the consumer pick whatever size screens they want (sony, samsung, mits, etc) and offer a compelling alternative to watching TV that is not their local cable provider.
but what would really sell ATV's faster pronto is to build it into Airport Extreme. every home needs a wifi/router hub. adding ATV would mean one less box and a lot more capabilities for a mere $100 more.
the AirPlay mirroring combo with iPad iOS 5 will be the Big New Thing that ignites sales.
Bottom line: if Apple introduces a 40 inch television that costs $2000, they'd better be prepared to watch it sit on shelves. It doesn't matter how compelling the total solution is - that price point is simply too high. You can buy 50 to 60 inch LED televisions in that price range (for less, actually) and many of them will ship with Netflix or Google TV built in. Perhaps those are inferior, but an offering from Apple, even including a TV pass and iOS games and applications... is not competitive enough at the price point indicated here.
This is a very flawed analysis. Although I can't make any guess as to whether or not Apple plans a TV, I can say that if they do make one, it better not come in at this price point, because that is a non-starter.
- Netflix has a download service for computers, Blu-ray players, and TVs.
- Many digital TV sets are Linux-based.
- A growing number of "smart TVs" look an awful lot like huge iPads.
- An iPad, iPhone, or iPod touch will make a great universal remote control that is truly "universal." Just like the iPhone has a nearly perfect emulator app for the HP48 handheld calculator, it should be possible to produce nearly perfect emulators for all models of remote controls for STBs, DVD players, Blu-ray players, and such like. The remote also need not require the user to remember channel numbers. Want to see college baseball on ESPN2? Press the ESPN2 button on the touch surface on the remote.
- Apple sells the iPad at a price-point lower than some of the competition. It is practically giving away OS X Lion. One should not expect a substantial premium for the Apple-branded TV if it is ever comes to market.
- TV models are updated annually, but individual owners may hold on to theirs for a decade or longer.
- There is huge downward pressure on the price of TV sets. Many flatscreens today cost about the same as did larger tube-based sets of a decade ago.
- OTA TV is not much of a problem. However, cable is a huge problem. Cable ISPs are much more fractured than cellphones. In some locations, you have a different cable provider if you move across the street.
- Cable providers are naturally pricks. They are even more so because they have to kow-tow to bigtime Hollywood producers.
- The TV must be compatible with satellite, IPTV, providers like Verizon FIOS and AT&T U-Verse.
This is an intriguing prospect for a number of reasons. One is that parts of the story are nearly impossible to believe. No current or former Apple executive would leak the story. He could be sued by Apple. If he were identified, then his new employer would not trust him. As I stated above, I don't believe the $2,000 price point.The market for TV sets is a challenging one. However, if Apple decides to enter it, then I am confident that it has plans to overcome the challenges.
The things that makes this intriguing the possibilities of change brought by Apple. Apple persuaded the record labels to end DRM in the iTMS. It persuaded AT&T to give great data plans for the iPhone and iPad.
It would be wonderful if Apple could break the cable providers' fixation of scrambling. Customer hate the cable box, but the providers foist them on us anyway. The Federal Government mandated the CableCard, but many cable franchises refuse to provide them. The prospect of Steve Jobs taking on the hide-bound culture of the cable companies is very nice to think about.
My bet is that Netflix eventually go the same way as Microsoft,Nokia,RIM,Sony,Nintendo and other supposedly 'untouchable' companies.
Google and/or Apple will assimilate or destroy them 100% for sure. I give them 3 years tops, and within that time the cracks will start showing.
Netflix, nobody can beat them, bla bla bla....
My bet is that Netflix eventually go the same way as Microsoft,Nokia,RIM,Sony,Nintendo and other supposedly 'untouchable' companies.
I'm not sure what you mean when you use the term "go the same way as" in connection with household brands like Sony, Nokia, and Microsoft. While Apple has succeeded in bringing some challenges to their businesses, it is far from a fore-gone conclusion that they are all on their way out. Apple has a very narrow and very successful business... but it is not a business that is going to put a Sony, Microsoft, or Nokia under the table.
Of the bunch you mention, only RIM I think is truly at risk of being put to death by Apple.
Netflix, nobody can beat them, bla bla bla....
My bet is that Netflix eventually go the same way as Microsoft,Nokia,RIM,Sony,Nintendo and other supposedly 'untouchable' companies.
Google and/or Apple will assimilate or destroy them 100% for sure. I give them 3 years tops, and within that time the cracks will start showing.
Blockbuster might be a more apropos analogy.
All netflix has is deals with content owners which Apple also has, though in a different .way. If Apple wanted to push for the same catalog as netflix in the same distribution model as Netflix they could probably get it once Netflix's current contracts are over.
I believe I read that Showtime will not be renewing with Netflix so that is something. If Netflix starts getting holes in their catalog the way Hulu does then the service could be seen as undesirable.
How about reasons it's not going to happen:
1. TV margins are razor thin.
2. Few consumers are going to pay a significant premium even for a better TV.
3. The market is immensely saturated and competition is intense.
4. A huge percentage of TVs are sold through mass market channels like Sam's Club, Walmart, Big Lots, etc - where there is absolutely no support available and no sales person to explain the advantages of the Apple HDTV.
5. An All-in-One TV makes no sense for home theatre. Can you imagine how bad the sound would be?
And so on.
Mobile phones margins are also thin (except for Apple mobile phones :-). And it's not about just margins, it about expanding ecosystem.
Sound would not be any worse then current Samsung or Sony TV, however there some new light digital amplifier technologies are available. From Sharp, for instance, this one pumps 70w per channel: http://www.ultimateavmag.com/content...iversal-player
You mean the "Incompetent Three"?
Absolutely.
AI loves to quote these three analysts with particularly poor track records.
I'm not sure what you mean when you use the term "go the same way as" in connection with household brands like Sony, Nokia, and Microsoft. While Apple has succeeded in bringing some challenges to their businesses, it is far from a fore-gone conclusion that they are all on their way out. Apple has a very narrow and very successful business... but it is not a business that is going to put a Sony, Microsoft, or Nokia under the table.
Of the bunch you mention, only RIM I think is truly at risk of being put to death by Apple.
I mean that people have said on this very forum, that all the above companies I mentioned had strangleholds which Apple could not or should not bother going up against. Apple has shoved every one of them aside and is now eating their lunch.
I'm sure none of them will disappear forever, but they sure are not the dominating beasts they once were.
And I see no decent reason why history will not repeat itself with netflix.
Thats a no brainer prediction IMO, and you are welcome to quote me on this in a couple of years.
Their best bet is to adopt Android in the long run. I see no other option. Same goes for RIM.
There is only room for one company to utilise Apples business model. Just as Apple was the last man standing against the likes of Amiga/Atari/Sinclair/Texas Instruments/ etc in the 80's 90's, history will repeat itself.
Jump on the android train or shut the company down and give the money back to the shareholders. Thats my advice! And I guarantee that HP fails in it's latest attempt to copy the Apple model as well.
Oh and as for Nokia and Microsoft, I look forward to seeing the comedy duo's next act. It should keep us entertained for at least a few more years.
BS
Apple moves their own hardware, keeps things simple, provides updates.
Limits sales to people who are in the market for a new TV.
In it's current form, that little black box known as Apple TV hooks up to any TV for a low cost.
Apple ma8y not always do what Apple is now doing. It used to not sell phones.
The problem with the aTV is that it is not really creating any kind of splash. And Apple is competing for input space on the TV.
Just run the optical out to your home theater system.
Did you expect any TV to replace a home theater system? If so, why?
No, I was trying to understand what the OP meant when he said that he replaced his "stereo" with an Apple TV. Out of all the A/V components, the only thing I could consider to be a stereo would be the receiver (since it usually has a radio tuner) which is generally the heart and soul of any home theater setup. If it had been the DVD player or CD player (or both) I could understand, but using the term "stereo" seems to say he gutted his system by removing the receiver portion and plugged an AppleTV (both audio and video) into his TV. And that would hardly result in a particularly good audio experience.
They tend to offer very few different models in one category and to be honest my TV in the living room is larger than 30'' and the TVs in other rooms are a lot smaller (because of space constraints).
I have no problem with iTV as long as the keep selling the ATV.
At the end of the day, I didn't buy that set because 1) cost was a bit higher then a wanted to spend, 2) Samsung's picture quality stinks in relation to Sharp, 3) Sharp's TV was designed better, and 4) I couldn't see myself supporting a foreign company that likes to rip everybody else off. I was tempted though.
TV applications are the next big thing. TV is a perfect fit for Apple. Apple provides the hardware along with seamless integration of Apple's other devices. App developers have another iOS device to make money on. Apple hedges its bets agains the future when PCs might be irrelevant for many. I was in a bankruptcy proceeding the other day. The government assistant was using an iPad with an attached keyboard to conduct business.
I don't believe it's true in the least. For starters, how would bundling iTunes with a TV blow Netflix away? I can pay $7.99/month and watch all the TV shows and movies I want. iTunes does not offer any comparable rental service. Also, I can watch Netflix on my Wii in one bedroom, PS3 in the living room, my Macbook Pros and iPhones. Even if Apple did offer a comparable rental service, with Netflix, I'm not locked to an Apple-branded device.
All you naysayers will be lining up around the Apple Store for iTV.
Nope, why over pay for a TV just to over pay for some movies?